Editor’s note: The following column contains content of a sexual
nature that some readers may find objectionable.

Those debating whether homosexuals should be scout leaders should
take a look at the dictionary to help decide whether or not homosexuals
have an inordinate interest in young boys. Or is it really as gay
rights leaders say — they just labor in young boys’ best interests.
Let’s look it up and see if pederasts (men who sexually assault boys)
comprise just a small cadre within the much larger male homosexual
population.

The dictionary I am talking about is not in your local library.
There, molester may be the only word “straights” would think of for men
who sexually assault boys. No, I am talking about “The Queens’
Vernacular” (QV), which is advertised as, “Everyman’s dictionary to the
gay underworld” and the “current language of a very large group of
people who are members (part or full-time) of the homosexual
community.” In the QV there are 254 words for boys, most of these
involve men sexually abusing boys.

Think about it. A dictionary has many words with subtle nuances for
that which is important and fewer words for the obvious or trivial.
Noah Webster collected 12,000 new words describing the governmental
differences between America and Britain for his 1828 American
Dictionary, which displaced Johnson’s English dictionary. In “The
Queens’ Vernacular,” anthropologist Bruce Rodgers also collected 12,000
words which describe the essential differences between “gays” and
“straights.” Yes Virginia, gays have their own 12,000 word dictionary
because “straight” language cannot describe their world. It is reallythat different.

When homosexuals debate Boy Scouts they mean something very different
than those relying on Webster’s dictionary. According to Rodgers’
authoritative homophile lexicon, “Boy Scout” and “boys” are defined in
the following ways:

Boy-scout queen: (sexually experimenting boy scouts who fear
giving a response); one who pretends to snooze as he is f—ed or s—ed
off.

But, is QV an esoteric, unknown vocabulary? Here is what
homophile leaders have to say. The 420 page “Long Road To Freedom: The
Advocate History of the Gay and Lesbian Movement” (1994) reports that:

The Queens’ Vernacular … firmly remains a form of
homosexual slang. … To gay men … something of a secret code
… in a hostile culture (emphasis added).

Writing in his anthology of homosexual “dictionaries and
glossaries,” Wayne Dynes, editor in chief of the “Encyclopedia of
Homosexuality,” notes that QV is the foremost gay lexicon, “reissued
without change as Gaytalk.” “The Joys of Gay Sex” authors
Silverstein and White and Dennis Altman in “The Homosexualization of
America” say amen to that!

Rodgers writes that his microcultural analysis required:

years of interviews with hundreds of informants … revealing thecommon speech of a traditionally oppressed minority. … It is a
book about words … agreed-upon symbols for recognizing things and
actions. … We use words to give expression to our thoughts about our
experience. … The Queens’ Vernacular demonstrates the
imagination, subtlety, humor, self-pity and downright masochism with
which gay people have forged the common language into a means of
communicating their experience.

These authors happened upon QV while conducting research on
“Partner Solicitation Characteristics as a Reflection of Male Sexual
Orientation” (Judith Reisman and Charles Johnson, 1995). So what are
some uniquely gay words for boys? Well remember this; boys are the
largest — most important — thematic category in the QV/”Gaytalk.”
Following is a small sample of the 254 “gay” words for boys, described
as “chicken.” Chicken is the primary QV term; it clearly implies that
boys are for consumption:

Chicken: a young recruit; any boy under the age of
consent, heterosexual, fair of face and unfamiliar with homosexuality.

Freshly killed: (butchered) recently introduced to a–
f—ing. “See how bowlegged that chicken walks — looks like he was
freshly killed in the hayloft.”

Pluck some feathers: rip off a drumstick; skin some chicken.

Head and heels: describing physical allurement, despite
extreme youth, but too young or small to know what to do in bed: he must
be helped by someone more experienced who will clasp the boy by his head
and heels to lift him onto the c—.

Jail tail: any boy below the age of consent with whom sex
merits a stretch in the pen.

Egg: a male child too young to be sexually developed and
therefore considered neuter. Syn: bibette; peepee meat; yo-yo. Related
terms: egg-sucker, a cradle robber; man who likes very young boys. Syn:
peepee lover. … “Anything older than ten is over the hill to a peepee
lover”. … “(R)eady to crack open,” said of a boy on the verge of
puberty. Also see chicken.

Cupcake: young girlish boy, though not necessarily gay …
cupcakes; small but rounded buttocks, most temptingly found on narrow
hipped boys. Syn: English Muffins; hone rolls; hot cross buns;
rounders. “Ask that kid with the rounders if he’d be interested in
joining in an ancient Greek initiation rite.”

Bait: attractive, young male in league with the police or
criminal element to entrap homosexuals into performing an act of sex in
a public place. “Be careful of that tearoom … there’s usually some
bait positioned around the throne-room.”

And on and on, for over a hundred more such terms. This lingo is
absent from all normal national dictionaries — for now. And, no
Virginia, affectionate, non-sexual or helpful words for boys did not
exist.

It is fair to say that Rodger’s 12,000 word QV lexicon supports
Webster’s statement — that language grows among the common people, and
that it is the common language which most accurately describes that
group’s beliefs, conduct, hopes, legal and political aspirations.

In 1828, Webster explained his “new vocabulary directly reflected the
American philosophy of government … (t)he Christian concept of
individual liberty and property established under the Constitution.” So
too is Rodger’s “new vocabulary directly related to the (homosexual)
philosophy of government.” In 254 words, this “traditionally oppressed
minority” would legalize access to any age boys (“chickens”) for sex.

So, the homosexual view of “life, individual liberty and property” is
radically subversive of the document known as the Declaration of
Independence. The QV should inform the debate on the Boy Scouts, age of
consent, affectional and sexual orientation and a wide array of “gay”
programs which would eliminate the constraints of American law. As in
“The U.N. Rights of the Child,” sexual psychopathic zealots would have
children become free agents, emancipated from their parents’ legal
protections and controls. This was exactly what
Alfred C.
Kinsey, the father of the sexual and gay rights revolutions, planned to occur in the second half of the 20th century.

Let’s come to terms in the debate. Look it up! Go get the homosexual dictionary and really learn what homosexual leaders — including legislators, judges, prosecuting attorneys — mean when they use their 12,000 word “secret code” among themselves. The real “gay” language exposes the well-hidden, vulnerable underbelly of the homosexual political agenda. As parents’ rights to rear and protect their children are destroyed to make room for more and more homosexual “civil rights,” these sexual revolutionaries celebrate, making their way, classroom by classroom, toward legal access to all our children.